Irell scores $200 million patent infringement verdict against Wells Fargo

Irell & Manella LLP attorneys persuaded an Eastern District of Texas jury to award $200 million in damages against Wells Fargo N.A. for infringing two of its client's patents on remote check deposit technology used in mobile bank systems.

And the plaintiff, United Services Automobile Association -- known as USAA -- could add to its damages total before the federal litigation is through. The Marshall, Texas jury concluded Wednesday Wells Fargo's infringement was willful, raising the possibility of treble damages. United Services Automobile Association v. Wells Fargo N.A., 18-00366 (E.D. Tex., filed June 7, 2018).

Further, there is another trial scheduled for January alleging Wells Fargo infringed another set of USAA patents.

Jason G. Sheasby, a partner in Los Angeles, and Lisa S. Glasser, a partner based in Newport Beach, represent USAA, which offers financial services to current and former members of the military. Sheasby declined to comment Thursday.

In closing arguments Wednesday, he asked jurors to award his client $299 million, saying the technology allowing a check to be deposited using a digital camera took more than a decade to develop. Wells Fargo's claim the technology isn't worth much is belied by the fact the bank still uses it even after being contacted by USAA and later sued, Sheasby said.

"If it's worthless, turn it off," Sheasby told the jury, according to the transcript. "You didn't hear sworn testimony from one Wells Fargo executive challenging USAA's position, not one."

"Wells Fargo strongly disagrees with this jury verdict and does not believe it has infringed on USAA's patent rights," bank spokesman Peter Gilchrist said in a statement Thursday. "We believe this is an industry issue involving numerous other banks that license remote mobile deposit technology from the same vendor, not USAA."

Wells Fargo is considering its legal options, he added.

Thomas M. Melsheimer, a Winston & Strawn LLP partner who represents Wells Fargo, told jurors the bank "gets no great benefit out of this technology they claim that we're using," arguing the plaintiff was trying to seek damages that conflate the total value of mobile deposits with what he described as USAA's "narrow" invention.